Re: btrfs vs write caching firmware bugs (was: Re: BTRFS recovery not possible)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2019-06-23 4:45 p.m., Zygo Blaxell wrote:

> 	Model Family: Western Digital Green Device Model: WDC WD20EZRX-00DC0B0 Firmware Version: 80.00A80
> 
> Change the query to 1-30 power cycles, and we get another model with
> the same firmware version string:
> 
> 	Model Family: Western Digital Red Device Model: WDC WD40EFRX-68WT0N0 Firmware Version: 80.00A80
> 

> 
> These drives have 0 power fail events between mkfs and "parent transid
> verify failed" events, i.e. it's not necessary to have a power failure
> at all for these drives to unrecoverably corrupt btrfs.  In all cases the
> failure occurs on the same days as "Current Pending Sector" and "Offline
> UNC sector" SMART events.  The WD Black firmware seems to be OK with write
> cache enabled most of the time (there's years in the log data without any
> transid-verify failures), but the WD Black will drop its write cache when
> it sees a UNC sector, and btrfs notices the failure a few hours later.
> 

First, thank you very much for sharing.  I've seen you mention several
times before problems with common consumer drives, but seeing one
specific identified problem firmware version is *very* valuable info.

I have a question about the Black Drives dropping the cache on UNC
error.  If a transid id error like that occurred on a BTRFS RAID 1,
would BTRFS find the correct metadata on the 2nd drive, or does it stop
dead on 1 transid failure?





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux